If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Thoughts about Adyashantis teachings

... just anyones experiences from Adya's teachings. I find him very down to earth, secular. Been into zen for many years and seems to have experienced a mature awakening to the buddha nature. He really gives me some hope in this dreadful state between two worlds where I find my self.

It is not an issue with ego, Neo, and we are not trying to live like Dogen.
Please spare us with your familiar language ( "come on, man") and if you have nothing else to say, please, sit and be quiet.
If you want to learn manners, you are my guest.

If you are happy with Adya's teachings, please, go for it and leave Treeleaf. It feels as if you are trying to sell what that guy has to sell. We have here nothing to sell, just water by the river. For extra experiences and various extraordinary stuff, get fully into the advaita-New age. And make peace with your heart choosing something that speaks to your heart.

I have to agree with the people saying your ego don't like him. And I don't like that you are trying to live like dogen, because we live in 2013 here. Come on man, secular buddhism is okey. :-)

I don't understand what you mean by secular buddhism. Could you please clarify? It seems to this clouded mind that what you mean by secular buddhism is buddhism that doesn't mind mixing traditions. Sort of like what MMA is to traditional martial arts. And you know what? I agree: that's OKAY. But as Jundo has pointed out so many times before when in the Aikido dojo, do not insist on Karate or MMA - they're both great but they're not our practice. There may be an "MMA-type" sangha that doesn't mind mixing Zen and Advaita. That is ok - but that is not Treeleaf. We respect other meditative practices (and some of us do other practices), but here we only practice Soto Zen.

Hah, we usually get criticized around here for being TOO secular, too open to mixing Zen Practice with Christianity, Judaism or other Paths, too open to "new" traditions for modern times, not trying to "live like the 13th century" enough!

Well, guess it depends on where one is coming from.

Personally, I am not an enemy of Advaita, should someone have in interest in such. Not at all, no more than I am an enemy of Christianity or Judaism. It is just that we do not Practice that Karate in our Ai-ki-do Dojo, and I happen to think that Adya-enchanter and some other folks (some Buddhist Priests, Christian preachers and Jewish Rabbis too) are not all they are cracked up to be. If he helps someone, or I am wrong, all the better!

Why would you want to join a Soto Zen sangha if you have a mentality like this In my short time here I have come across extremely open minded and compassionate individuals who are willing to offer their opinions and teachings to genuinely help others. 2013 or not, our practice is still relevant. I hope you keep an open mind during your time here!

I have to agree with the people saying your ego don't like him. And I don't like that you are trying to live like dogen, because we live in 2013 here. Come on man, secular buddhism is okey. :-)

Hi Neo,

I see nothing wrong with your post or the way you feel. But then I don't see anything wrong with what the teachers here say too. How is that possible?

I can see where you are coming from and it might feel like the teachers are too rigid or non-secular but trust me that's not the case. Zen is quite different from other spiritual teachings and it might feel like a bit of shock if we come into zen and try to apply what we previously learnt here. It is important to come with a fresh mind and be willing to unlearn our previous ways even if sometimes it doesn't fit with our logical mindset.

Now what Taigu is saying to you might feel rude and might piss you off. He was asking me to leave too. So you are not alone here. Now please don't leave or think that teachers here are rigid. Being put to shame is okay. It feels not okay and that is okay too. But dont leave. this is a great forum and the teaching here is really authentic. don't lose this just for a forum discussion conflict. keep sitting. Zazen is the greatest teacher.

And I didn't really think much when I made my post about adyashanti. I should not have posted that link to that old thread. I probably don't feel the same way about adyashanti now. I made the post out of an old habit rather than saying truly what I feel about him now. I still think he is articulate and insightful but I don't really follow or read him much these days. zen feels enough. The only advice I can give you is not to follow multiple teachings. I feel it is important to listen to the teachers and dedicate yourself to one teaching (the teaching here). But if you don't really feel up to it now, you may continue to read/listen to adya but do keep sitting (true meditation or shikantaza way) for a few months and see if you feel any different.

If I may say so, that is a very mature response that reflects well on the state of your practice. Not sure I would be quite so considered were it suggested I might take my leave!

Am happy you are fully engaging with the teachings here. As you say, dedicating yourself to one teaching is important and although it can be good to lurk here for a while to decide if it feels right, eventually we have to commit or else there is little point in staying.

something that a lot of people may misunderstand at times is the fact ( and I know I cannot speak for Taigu or Jundo...just for myself) that when one says matter of factly "you can leave" it doesn't mean someone wants to kick someone else out, but it is a direct statement underlining the obvious sometimes, that we are not recruiting around here. The door to this sangha is open both ways. It doesn't mean criticism is not allowed etc., but it can mean that if one feels that the nature of the teachings around here doesn't really agree with one's own likes and dislikes one always has the option of just leaving.

And just in case anyone is interested in my purely subjective opinion, I personally feel that Adyashanti did have a lot of very intersting things to say and that he had great ways of communicating certain of his deepest insights when he was lesser known....a few years further down the line however, what he is offering and how he is offering it has become almost not distinguishable from a lot of other New-Age "products".

If you don't understand what I mean by secular buddhism, here u go bro.

Hi Neo,

Not only am I a friend and general supporter of Ted Meissner and the other folks associated with the Secular Buddhist group you linked to (wonderful podcast, by the way), I consider that Treeleaf (or, at least, my corner of it) may fall within their definition of "Secular Buddhist".

Secular Buddhism is concerned with the practice of Siddhattha Gotama’s four noble truths in this world. It encourages a naturalistic and pragmatic approach to the teaching, seeking to provide a framework for personal and social development within the cultural context of our time. ... The primary difference is that Secular Buddhism has no dependency on assertions not in evidence, it is based solely on that which can be verified in the natural world. It does not rule out such claims, but merely recognizes that such assertions (like literal rebirth) have not been able to provide any externally verifiable or convincing evidence. And, like the claims of other religions which cannot be verified by any known means, can be set aside. ... Secular Buddhist are either agnostic about rebirth, or don’t believe in literal rebirth. The word secular can have the meaning of having to do with this lifetime, this natural world, or may also be interpreted as to be lacking in religious tradition.

For those secular Buddhists who have not found there to be enough valid evidence for a literal rebirth, there is still a benefit to viewing textual references to rebirth as metaphor. That is, taken as a reference to our moment by moment arising and falling of the concept of self, rebirth helps us to investigate and loosen our ideas about who we are, and how we engage with the present moment. In this way, references to rebirth can be quite helpful in broadening our awareness of situations in which we find ourselves, get a bit more space between our perceptions and our reactions, and make better decisions right now.

We are working very hard to make Traditional Teachings relevant for our time. In fact, I do not see anything on that page that particularly would exclude us, so maybe you can enlighten me if you see something. For example, I often describe myself as an "open minded but skeptical agnostic (and anyway what matters is Practice here and now)" on extremely literal, fanciful and mechanical descriptions of the workings of Karma and Rebirth. In fact, by such definition, we may be closer to "secular Buddhists" than Mr. Adyashanti!

Neo, I wonder if you don't mean secular Buddhism, which (as Jundo says) is a move away from faith based beliefs such as reincarnation and literal Buddhist cosmology, but rather non-sectarian Buddhism or Buddhist modernism, which tends to mix and match dharma from a variety of sources?

The former is pretty in line with what is taught here. The latter, not so much.

I get the feeling from Jundo that everyone is welcome to receive teaching from other sources as well as Treeleaf and there is no compulsion to just stick to the teachings and suggested reading here. However, the forum is for the discussion of Soto Zen practice and teachings, particularly the practice of shikantaza as outlined by the teachers here and other teachers from the same and related lineages. So, while we are free to read and practice whatever we like, bringing in other teachings and practice methods muddies the water and can confuse people. With that in mind, it is respectful to the sangha here to leave your other teachings and teachers at the doors of the forum before entering.

There are other more wide-ranging Buddhist forums but, while those benefit from a diverse blend of views and teachings, they do not exist to provide practice instruction from a lineage like Treeleaf does and that requires a certain clarity of focus.

I hope you can benefit from the teachings here. No need to discard everything else but when in Rome, sit like the Romans.

Why would you want to join a Soto Zen sangha if you have a mentality like this In my short time here I have come across extremely open minded and compassionate individuals who are willing to offer their opinions and teachings to genuinely help others. 2013 or not, our practice is still relevant. I hope you keep an open mind during your time here!

I just said that we should be our self, in 2013, and still apply buddhist/zen concepts on our lives. We don't have to live like a monk 1000 years ago, because we don't have the same world view. And I don't understand why I am unmannered. We are just having a discussion here. You got me wrong my friend, I like dogens teachings about the true reality.

We don't have to live like a monk 1000 years ago, because we don't have the same world view.

You seem to be holding on to preconceived notions of what the practice here is. Even if someone in Treeleaf was trying live like a monk 1000 years ago, I think they would feel slightly torn by using the Internet to connect with members of the sangha . As far as the unmannered comment, you did reply a little abrasively to what the teachers said based on what you assume to be the way things are here. 1513, 2013, 2513, it doesn't matter!

Maybe a little less tit for tat and a little more compassion will make for good medicine. Going back in forth over perhaps a misunderstanding, maybe it is time to sit just for a bit.

Neo, words are what we make of them, the hazards of posting and what other's interpretation of what we meant. I agree we now live in the year 2013, but we learn from one that lived 2500 or so years ago, otherwise why are we "Buddhist". The teachings are passed down and we adapt them to the present, we don't change them to suit our desires. You are correct that we don't have to live as a monk but for those that choose to live as monks that is good for them. Sometimes we try to mold everything to fit our personal needs and desires. Perhaps, sometimes we need to just be. Secular or non-secular Buddhism, makes so little difference to me. I am a "Zen Buddhist" because I have read words from the past that work so well in the present.

I do hope that you will stick around, you have given us so much to think about in just a short time. As has already been said, lot's of good teaching here at Treeleaf. We just need to take time to listen to one another.

Gassho,
Heishu

平
秀“Blessed are the flexible, for they never get bent out of shape." Author Unknown

Maybe a little less tit for tat and a little more compassion will make for good medicine. Going back in forth over perhaps a misunderstanding, maybe it is time to sit just for a bit.

Neo, words are what we make of them, the hazards of posting and what other's interpretation of what we meant. I agree we now live in the year 2013, but we learn from one that lived 2500 or so years ago, otherwise why are we "Buddhist". The teachings are passed down and we adapt them to the present, we don't change them to suit our desires. You are correct that we don't have to live as a monk but for those that choose to live as monks that is good for them. Sometimes we try to mold everything to fit our personal needs and desires. Perhaps, sometimes we need to just be. Secular or non-secular Buddhism, makes so little difference to me. I am a "Zen Buddhist" because I have read words from the past that work so well in the present.

I do hope that you will stick around, you have given us so much to think about in just a short time. As has already been said, lot's of good teaching here at Treeleaf. We just need to take time to listen to one another.

If Buddism has ineffable truth, this truth is primary: true 3000yrs ago, 1000yrs ago and true now. There may be secondary values that are held and change in relation to time and place, but they will be to ensure an awareness, an understanding an experience of the primary. This is Dharma.

I do not know about rebirth. I prefer to agree with the Zen Teacher, whom when asked by his Emperor and Patron, "What happens after death', replied, "I don't know", The Emperor retorted " Why don't you know!"The Teacher answered "Because I have not yet died".

This does not mean that we cannot experience transmigration after all the dharma teaches impermanence and we experience this everyday in all things. All I know is that from practice I am aware of unity, of oneness, of the interdependence of all things and emptiness That this experience is beyond birth and death but contains birth and death. It is not grasped and ungraspable.: without this how can we understand karma, without understanding karma how can we make the Bodhisattva vows, vows we take everyday. In this we just sit.
Homage to the Buddha
Homage to the Dharma
Homage to the Sangha

I will end this thread now that came to be about things that wasn't the original meaning. I think you misunderstood me at some points, I do like buddhism alot. But just as Jesus used the word god and heaven to explain to the Judes about 'emptiness', "the kingdom of heaven is within your self". The buddha used karma and rebirth to explain to the religious hindus about the state of nirvana. In that manner, I think some concepts, manners, etc from the strict japan 1000 years ago will put som splinters in peoples minds today in the western world. Personally I enjoy japaneese/kineese culture very much, and zen seem to me to be the most secular tradition there is. It's about the core in buddhist teachings, just sitting, realzing the truth. I'm sorry if you thought I wanted to be rude in some day, that was not my intention at all.

My main point was that Adyashanti does come through to alot of people that really need spiritual guidence, as do Eckhart Tolle.

The idea that the Buddha used karma and rebirth to teach 'Hindus' (Hinduism per se did not exist in 500 BCE) is a controversial one. It has been pointed out that Shakyamuni did not endear himself to Brahmins by going against the principle of atman so why would he not challenge them on rebirth if he did not agree with it? See http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/truth_of_rebirth.html for example. Likewise, I think that Christians would challenge your (re)interpretation of their scripture. We have to be careful not to interpret religions as saying what we would like them to say rather than what they do actually present.

Adya and Eckhart do indeed speak to a lot of people and that is a very good thing. If you have sat along to the latest Zazenkai here you will see that Jundo (as he often does) speaks against the notion that we have to live or dress as Japanese people from today or the past in order to practice effectively. Sure, we have to read Dogen and earlier Buddhist teachings through the lens of the culture at the time but likewise we have to be careful not to squeeze teachings from the past into the present culture and lose some of their meaning on the way.

Yes I know it's controversial, and it's a big topic about rebirth in the buddhist communities right now for what I've come to understand. The interesting thing though is that it doesnt matter to our practice if it exists or not. I even think buddha stated this, something like: "You are doing best in following my teachings even though rebrith exists or not". And alot of zen masters seemed to not care that much about the afterlife. I even would say that rebirth can be seen as a methaphor for 'dying in every second', 'rebirth exists in every moment of time' and maybe the buddha used it just as this, to explain the philosophy of impermancence.

Neo, I think it is only controversial in western Buddhist circles. Traditional Tibetan and Theravadin communities don't seem to have a problem with it.

The idea of rebirth being a metaphor tends only to be used by those who don't like the traditional presentation. There is no evidence the Buddha himself ever used it in this way. I have no problem with anyone believing what they like, and have a 'don't know mind' stance on rebirth myself, but I have seen evidence of Buddhist modernism twisting the Pali canon to suit their own viewpoint which is something to be wary of.

Neo, I think it is only controversial in western Buddhist circles. Traditional Tibetan and Theravadin communities don't seem to have a problem with it.

The idea of rebirth being a metaphor tends only to be used by those who don't like the traditional presentation. There is no evidence the Buddha himself ever used it in this way. I have no problem with anyone believing what they like, and have a 'don't know mind' stance on rebirth myself, but I have seen evidence of Buddhist modernism twisting the Pali canon to suit their own viewpoint which is something to be wary of.

Gassho
Andy

I'm not sure if all the zen masters believed/cared about rebirth in the literally sense, but im very aware of that the most buddhist tradition does. But if you've read something by Stephen Batchelor you know what I mean. It's a very intreresting subject to me this one. And I'm sure we never can know for sure what really was buddhas core teachings and what just followed as the common world view from that time.

If you don't understand what I mean by secular buddhism, here u go bro.

Thanks for the link. I assume you were responding to my previous post. Here's a section of the FAQ that seems most relevant to this thread:

"Why do we need Secular Buddhism when we already have many different Buddhist traditions?

Like all traditions, Buddhism evolves to suit the culture in which it finds itself. Our contemporary Western culture is inclined to more secular views; the growth of Secular Buddhism is an inevitable manifestation of these attitudes. It is also a wonderful opportunity, as having a practice which does not in any way rely on adherence to a particular religious doctrine (one not in evidence) opens up that practice to people of all faiths, and no faith. It clearly makes Secular Buddhism much more accessible to all people, not just those willing to accept a cultural or religious tradition not their own.

Do the practices of Secular Buddhism differ from other Buddhist practices?

Secular Buddhism recognizes the diversity of individual preferences when it comes to contemplative practice. The forms one uses are entirely based upon what is demonstrably effective, there are no requirements or proscriptions. One person may chant and light incense as being helpful to them in setting the tone of their meditation, for example, while another person finds those to be ineffective in their own practice."

As Jundo pointed out we are usually seen as TOO secular. How many sanghas do you know that are 100% online - that is, that hold their classes, discussions, dokusan, and religious services via the Internet? Shukke Tokudo or home-leaving here takes on a different dimension from the Shukke Tokudo of a temple like Antaiji. So do Zazenkai and Ango. Zen is evolving to suit the Internet culture of Treeleaf. We are not, as you said in your earlier post, "trying to live like Dogen". At the same time, you could say we are trying to live like Dogen - if Dogen lived in the twenty-first century.

At the same time, this is still a Zen sangha. And although yes, some things have changed some things necessarily have to remain the same. Otherwise why call it Zen? You can only remove so much. Here we practice shikantaza zazen. Telling our teachers "but this is 2013, secular buddhism is okay" is like going to the Aikido dojo and telling the instructor "but this is 2013, MMA is okay!" It is okay and there is a bit of overlap in the sense that we are not, again, trying to live like it was thirteenth century Japan - but here we don't mix and match though the teachers do not forbid us to look into other practices on our own. And as far as I can understand Taigu and Jundo, that's the only point they want to get across. (Okay, they also have their opinions on Adyashanti which may or may not jive with yours. I don't necessarily agree with them either, but I don't know Adyashanti so I can't really say anything worthwhile about it.)

Apologies for bringing it back to this point. I may be beating a dead horse here, but I feel it's important to repeat this point.

Yes I know it's controversial, and it's a big topic about rebirth in the buddhist communities right now for what I've come to understand. The interesting thing though is that it doesnt matter to our practice if it exists or not. I even think buddha stated this, something like: "You are doing best in following my teachings even though rebrith exists or not". And alot of zen masters seemed to not care that much about the afterlife. I even would say that rebirth can be seen as a methaphor for 'dying in every second', 'rebirth exists in every moment of time' and maybe the buddha used it just as this, to explain the philosophy of impermancence.

If there is rebirth, chop wood and carry water.
If there is no rebirth, chop wood and carry water.

Thanks for the link. I assume you were responding to my previous post. Here's a section of the FAQ that seems most relevant to this thread:

"Why do we need Secular Buddhism when we already have many different Buddhist traditions?

Like all traditions, Buddhism evolves to suit the culture in which it finds itself. Our contemporary Western culture is inclined to more secular views; the growth of Secular Buddhism is an inevitable manifestation of these attitudes. It is also a wonderful opportunity, as having a practice which does not in any way rely on adherence to a particular religious doctrine (one not in evidence) opens up that practice to people of all faiths, and no faith. It clearly makes Secular Buddhism much more accessible to all people, not just those willing to accept a cultural or religious tradition not their own.

Do the practices of Secular Buddhism differ from other Buddhist practices?

Secular Buddhism recognizes the diversity of individual preferences when it comes to contemplative practice. The forms one uses are entirely based upon what is demonstrably effective, there are no requirements or proscriptions. One person may chant and light incense as being helpful to them in setting the tone of their meditation, for example, while another person finds those to be ineffective in their own practice."

As Jundo pointed out we are usually seen as TOO secular. How many sanghas do you know that are 100% online - that is, that hold their classes, discussions, dokusan, and religious services via the Internet? Shukke Tokudo or home-leaving here takes on a different dimension from the Shukke Tokudo of a temple like Antaiji. So do Zazenkai and Ango. Zen is evolving to suit the Internet culture of Treeleaf. We are not, as you said in your earlier post, "trying to live like Dogen". At the same time, you could say we are trying to live like Dogen - if Dogen lived in the twenty-first century.

At the same time, this is still a Zen sangha. And although yes, some things have changed some things necessarily have to remain the same. Otherwise why call it Zen? You can only remove so much. Here we practice shikantaza zazen. Telling our teachers "but this is 2013, secular buddhism is okay" is like going to the Aikido dojo and telling the instructor "but this is 2013, MMA is okay!" It is okay and there is a bit of overlap in the sense that we are not, again, trying to live like it was thirteenth century Japan - but here we don't mix and match though the teachers do not forbid us to look into other practices on our own. And as far as I can understand Taigu and Jundo, that's the only point they want to get across. (Okay, they also have their opinions on Adyashanti which may or may not jive with yours. I don't necessarily agree with them either, but I don't know Adyashanti so I can't really say anything worthwhile about it.)

Apologies for bringing it back to this point. I may be beating a dead horse here, but I feel it's important to repeat this point.